Realty In Ca1 MCP Server

Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?

With no annotations provided, the description carries full responsibility for behavioral disclosure but provides none. It does not specify what 'scores' represent (walkability, safety, schools?), whether the operation is read-only, rate limits, or what radius constitutes the 'surround area' given the schema lacks a radius parameter.

Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.

Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?

Extremely concise at seven words with no redundancy. However, the brevity comes at the cost of necessary context; while not verbose, it under-specifies rather than efficiently communicates.

Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.

Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?

Inadequate for the domain complexity. With numerous sibling tools handling properties, demographics, and statistics, and no output schema or annotations to clarify return values, the description must explain what specific scores are returned and how they differ from sibling tools—it does not.

Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.

Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?

Schema has 100% description coverage with clear definitions for lat/lng and locale. The description mentions 'surround area' which adds context that the coordinates represent a center point for a regional search rather than an exact property lookup, but otherwise adds little beyond the schema documentation.

Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.

Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?

The description states the action ('Get scores') and mechanism ('by GEO location'), but 'scores' remains vague and undefined in the real estate context. It fails to differentiate from siblings like 'propertiesget_demographics' or 'propertiesget_statistics_deprecated', leaving users uncertain what specific data this returns versus other property analytics tools.

Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.

Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?

No guidance provided on when to use this tool versus alternatives. Given siblings include 'propertiesdetail' (specific property) and 'propertiesget_demographics' (area demographics), the description should clarify this tool retrieves area-based scores rather than individual property details or demographic statistics.

Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.